TRINDER SUPPORTS ORDYNSKI ON VRO

[Col Trinder]

TRINDER SUPPORTS ORDYNSKI ON VRO

Acting ARCom Chairman Col Trinder supported comments by Ed Ordynski today regarding the stated aims of the Victorian Rally Organisation.

"Of course I agree with Ed. He’s absolutely right that we should always look carefully at any measure that will deliver to members efficiencies in the services that CAMS gives them. When the VRO has firmed up its ideas about better ways of doing things we should give them serious consideration" Trinder said.

Ordynski's comments were reported today on the RallySport News web site:
http://www.rallysportmag.com.au/home...=2056&Itemid=2.
He supported the objectives of the VRO and said that these complemented those of CAMS.

"I haven’t had the opportunity yet, but I am keen to sit down and talk with the VRO about their ideas so we can work together to improve rallying in Australia and give CAMS members and rallying the best possible service" Trinder said.

"I understand that the new VRO has already been talking with CAMS to develop some practical ideas – particularly about how the revenue that has been collected through levies on CAMS members for road damage could best be employed for the benefit of rallying and the CAMS members who contributed the funds” Trinder said.

"I’ll also ensure that at every opportunity ARCom will be actively considering what it can do to support proposals coming forward that promote better, more efficient service delivery to all levels of the sport" Trinder said.

[tortfeaser]

I think you're nuts Col. This is the beginning of the absolute balkanisation of rallying. CAMS outsources rallying admin to six different xROs means no ability to determine a national set of standards. Six different xROs running six different sets of sporting, technical, safety, organising regulations. Have you thought this through?

Not only would it be rubbish for state competitors (no longer a national market for cars and events), it'd be bad for the ARC - no longer would state competitors be able to compete there if the technical and sporting regs don't line up.

Its nuts. Great for CAMS, they get to wash their hands of anything that is hard while still raking in the same $ from licences and permits. Bad for members who get even less than before.

Frankly, I can understand Ed supporting it. But I thought Col had a bit more sense.

[bob moore]

Originally Posted by tortfeaser

Six different xROs running six different sets of sporting, technical, safety, organising regulations. Have you thought this through?

Works for me.

First we have a VRO. Someone has to get the ball rolling, at a manageable level.

Then we have a NSWRO, a QRO, an SARO, a ..........(you can see where this is going).

Then they all get together and become the Australian RO. If they are all driven by the same/similar vision, it's quite realistic. Problem solved. Bright, shiny new world.

You know it makes sense!

[Factor]

Well spoken Mr Trinder - and Mr Ordynski. Forget balkanisation, its more war of idependance in action, its about no taxation without representation

[Spac]

Hmm, maybe.

CAMS has made it clear that they 'don't like' rallying, particularly the sub-ARC stuff.
Ed's support is, most probably, due to his desire to see CAMS get a slap-in-the-face wake-up call: "The CAMS empire must be more than a house of cards and we need more from you. If not, we're going to have to go Balkan and you get (virtually) nothing".

Why anyone else who is actively involved in the future of rallying would have a different point of view is beyond me?

[MarkH]

CAMS has continually made it clear that rallying is a nuisance and it should run away and do what it is told.
The stupid things they have brought in over the last few years have shown that rallying was an afterthought.
Officials licences that have no relevence to rallying and a total resistance to allow rallying to have input. Compliace Checker that replicates the work of the EVent Checker are just a couple of examples.

Cams is moving away from State based anything, we need local organisations to liaise with local communities,councils, land managers etcd rego authoriities etc. Witness the move to national permits and the lack of urgency to find a new NSW State Manager.
Speaking to a former State Office Employee recently and stating my view that the State Offices would soon disappear, that person expressed the same view.

It make sense to have a VRO, just as it makes sense to have the same springing up in other states.

CAMS has dropped the ball, it time others picked it up.

[DaveTrees]

Originally Posted by tortfeaser

I think you're nuts Col. This is the beginning of the absolute balkanisation of rallying. CAMS outsources rallying admin to six different xROs means no ability to determine a national set of standards. Six different xROs running six different sets of sporting, technical, safety, organising regulations. Have you thought this through?

Not only would it be rubbish for state competitors (no longer a national market for cars and events), it'd be bad for the ARC - no longer would state competitors be able to compete there if the technical and sporting regs don't line up.

Its nuts. Great for CAMS, they get to wash their hands of anything that is hard while still raking in the same $ from licences and permits. Bad for members who get even less than before.

Frankly, I can understand Ed supporting it. But I thought Col had a bit more sense.

Tort - I think you are reading WAY too much into this ......

I see the VRO as a logical extension of what the VRAP has been doing (or trying to do, anyway !) ... which is acting as a co-ordinating/advocacy agent for the sport.

Not being an incorporated body, the VRAP currently can't even have a bank account to manage it's own finances ! Instead, they by default disappear into the black hole of CAMS accounts.

Knowing the people involved in getting this off the ground, I'm pretty confident it should work OK in Victoria. No-one is forcing (or even suggesting) that other states follow suit ... in fact it will have no impact on anyone outside Victoria that I can see.

[Jme]

What else can Trinder do?

.

[Kaptainballistik]

Just take cams out of it, They set the rules, We go play.

[tortfeaser]

Originally Posted by Kaptainballistik

Just take cams out of it, They set the rules, We go play.

Can you imagine that happening? Why would we be happy with some hand of god regulator not listening?

[Adrian]

I can see these xRO groups developing into wannabe Rallycops,

That is all we need.

If we want to take rallying away from CAMS (and I am not sure about this) and make our own rules it should be a national group and be like karting and drags not a whole lot of little rallycops' running around spending OUR money

Adrian

[Kaptainballistik]

Correct.

[Ric Cary]

Originally Posted by Adrian

I can see these xRO groups developing into wannabe Rallycops,

That is all we need.

If we want to take rallying away from CAMS (and I am not sure about this) and make our own rules it should be a national group and be like karting and drags not a whole lot of little rallycops' running around spending OUR money

Adrian

Somebody had to start Adrian, these incorporated elected entities will from my understanding be able to provide several solutions to problems that have been festering under CAMS umbrella for years.They are clearly not out to declare war on CAMS they are merely going to facilitate an open market place, lets face it CAMS major contribution to our sport is as an insurance broker they perform no liason duties with any of the Regulatory bodies that we deal with like Forestry , Council or Police,They perform no checks and balances on our events as you well know these functions are all performed by the various volunteer Rally Panels and they slavishly follow edicts on class structures and equipment levels from across the world that have little or no relevance to the majority of competitors. from my understanding the RO model has no intention of disenfranchising those competitors who want to stay within the existing Gpn, PRC type rules they have simply created a model that will allow the organisers more freedoms to open up the sport to dare I say it lower cost performance opportunities, less onerous licencing and officials regulations and marginally cheaper permit options. I fully agree with you that if and when other states take up this model their will need to be close consultation between the existing organisations to keep a consistent set of standards and regulations.It is my opinion that without the unwieldy and largely deaf beureacracy that is CAMS who have consistently displayed a complete lack of knowledge with regard to the specifics of our sport changes can be made to welcome and even entice more people to become part of it, by the people who know the sport and the issues involved with it, in a much more timely and pro active fashion.
From my understanding and investigation the competeing sanctioning bodies provide at least equall to if not more comprehensive insurance covers for both competitors and volunteer officials alike, in fact the AASA policies were facilitated by one of the same people who first placed the CAMS insurances in place.
As to having a whole lot of little rallycorps running around spending our money
1. At least if this does happen which I personally doubt they will be spending it on US
2. From my understanding the model will be completely transparent and the representatives of the various Organisations will be nominated and elected from amongst the competitor/ official base and unlike the current " Advisory Panel" system will have the power to make changes that are seen as neccesary and reasonable by the majority rather than have recomendations just dissapear into the ether because they don't suit a particular agenda that is being pushed by the beaureacracy.
CAMS should be jumping for joy over this issue they have been telling us for years that Rally runs at a loss , Now they have the opportunity to cut the dead weight away, I sincerely hope that both organisations can now prosper. CAMS without the onerous task of supporting we poor grass roots Rallyists who suck the life blood out of their organisation will now be able to plough all that revenue that Rallycorp has been making back into the ARC and make that the jewel in the crown and finally prove what they have been telling us all these years that we don't subsidise the top end of the sport. Messrs Ashton , Connelly et Al will finally be able to recoup the funds that they so kindly donated for the love of the sport to get Rallycorp where it is today, and we poor lowly Rallyist's with no idea will be able to muddle along with set of rules and regulations that we in our niave way believe are relevant to our sport, All the really clever people who have been doing such a good job up until now have to do is sit back and watch us hash it up so they can have a good giggle

[Edosan]

I think Ric has this pretty right. The xRO is not about creating a mass walkout Australia-wide from CAMS or rewriting all the rules and regulations.

It is simply about empowering the states to take greater influence over their rallying future.

Im my brief time on ARCom it was obvious the state rally panels (and those they represent) are infinitely more experienced, caring and passionate about the sport than those currently dictating its future.

For Victoria, incorporating the rally panel so it can function somewhat autonomously means that they have half a chance of getting returned rightfully to the Vic rally community, a large sum of money held by CAMS.

For NSW, for example, it could mean having the ability to gain sponsorship or TV coverage again for the NSWRC, without the rights going via say, Rallycorp.

In Q it could mean that competitors from FNQ don't have to drive 1000km to get a logbook or whatever.

The xRO in the main would do the outstanding work the rally panels have always done - but with more teeth than being an advisory group to people who neither care about the sport nor understand it.

[DaveTrees]

Originally Posted by Edosan

For Victoria, incorporating the rally panel so it can function somewhat autonomously means that they have half a chance of getting returned rightfully to the Vic rally community, a large sum of money held by CAMS.....

.... xRO in the main would do the outstanding work the rally panels have always done - but with more teeth than being an advisory group to people who neither care about the sport nor understand it.

Hi Ed

Good to see someone on here actually gets it !!

Dave Gallacher